Charles James Cahill, Jr., 49, is someone all too familiar to police. Cahill has 12 prior drunk driving convictions. He can now add a 13th arrest, but in this latest case there is a dead 12-year-old girl. Cahill hit a family’s van from behind on July 27th at 8:18 p.m. He then tested at almost three times the legal level of alcohol in his blood. Notably, his license was revoked by the Secretary of State in 1990. He is now facing charges of second-degree murder, operating with a high blood alcohol content causing death, operating while intoxicated third offense and driving while license suspended causing death and a misdemeanor charge of open intoxicants in a motor vehicle.

Cahill was speeding when he rear-ended the minivan, which contained three girls — 12-year-old Victoria Mack and two others, ages 2 and 3. Victoria Mack (right) was in the third seat and, after being cut out of the wreckage, was put on life support for three days before she died.

Cahill’s drunk driving arrests go back to 1986. His license has been revoked 24 times and suspended 17 times since 1986.

The tragedy and pain for Victoria’s family must be magnified by this man’s long criminal history. This is a chilling record and highlights the problem of how to address some with an obvious drinking addiction and a long recidivist history. His license was taken away but he was still at large and able to drive. The question is whether such individuals should be incarcerated. At some point, they have to be released so the question is how long should such people be imprisoned and what should be the condition of release.

Comment navigation

There seems to be a misconception here. Guys like this sh!tbird have their driving privileges revoked. They simply choose to ignore the revocation. I can’t count the number of people I have followed on surveillance who I knew had no driver’s license for a myriad reasons including DUI’s.

Nick – up until a couple of weeks ago I was driving with an expired license. It had been expired for a couple of years. I did not know that until I tried to rent a car and they checked the date. Very embarrassing.

I am a huge fan of using San Clemente Island, one of the Channel Islands as place to incarcerate these menaces to society. I’m talking about those that have proven unable/unwilling to fit within civil society. Drop them off, provide them the means to survive and let them hash it out with the others. BTW, no need to have the military stop using the island for target practice.

That beautiful girl. You can just see her joie de vivre shining from her eyes. My heart goes out to her family, who have suffered a wound that will never heal.

Drunk driving is like having an unguided missile on the freeway with all the rest of us. It is a lethal situation. When people are repeat offenders, and when they continue to drive drunk while their license is revoked, then it appears that they will resist all efforts to check them.

On the one hand, their living among us puts all of our lives in danger. On the other hand, they are addicts, and unable to control themselves. Forced alcoholism rehab never works. You cannot put an addict in remission against his will, because he or she will not cooperate.

I think at the very least we need to put ignition breathalyzers on their vehicles even if their license is revoked. Of course, they could just go buy another vehicle off Craigslist.

Will we find ourself in the position of having to sentence these alcoholic drunk drivers to life for the safety of the public? It seems like an unconstitutional sentence if no one had been harmed to that point. What can we do?

We have been affected by drunk driving. I’m looking at a photo right now of a handsome teenager with his whole life ahead of him who was killed just before graduating high school. It was not the first time the driver had hurt someone.

“The highest I’ve seen is 18. Although I bet there are some w/ more than 20. If these people are not incarcerated they will drive drunk. Therefore, they must be incarcerated until they die.”

#1 this makes me never, ever, want to go to Wisconsin. That’s awful. #2 I think you are right that when these repeat offenders resist all efforts to check them, the only thing left is incarceration. And since they will just do it again the moment they are out, since they did not dry out willingly, then it’s got to be life.

Can they constitutionally defend a life sentence for a non violent crime, if no one has been hurt yet by the DUIs? Because I would not want to wait for someone to die to have to protect the public.

Allow me to poke some fun here, I have no taste…
I would fit his car with nine inch nails on the steering wheel or inside the airbag…. OR.. sue google for taking too friggin long with the selfdriving cars, ffs!

Sooo, before this killing, who would spend more time in jail and have a record which will keep him out of good employment opportunities?
1. The Hooters 18 yr old kid fake cop
2. A drunk driver–46\

Who is most likely to reoffend?
Who is most likely to kill kids?

On a more generalized level…
Who is most likely to commit mass murder?
Who routinely commits mass murder?
What instrument legally and openly available to anyone with cash annually kills more people in a single incident?

Hint, 4 wheels almost always operated by a licensed operator. The only one painted pink to designate harmless…??…well it used to be a Mary Kay edition. Don’t know if pink is still mandated.

Really tired of the old “…but it’s a disease…” excuse. While there may be some evidence that alcoholism has a medical/organic component, “drinking” is not a disease. “Driving” is definitely not a disease. Would we hear the same sympathetic voices for an alcoholic who beats his wife? “It’s a disease,” right?

An enlightened society would have caned or flogged this dude the second time he was convicted of DWI, jailed him the third time (with another caning or flogging), and then if there was ever a 4th time, executed him.

But we are not enlightened. Sooo, we run straight into The Paradox of Civilization, which states, “Societies will reach a point where any additional attempt to be civilized, will be met by less over-all civilization.” Such, as the SCOTUS basically banning the Death Penalty, thus loading up the prisons with murderers, who thus become more murderous.

We im Michigan have been dumbfounded by this. Our lawzhave been close to draconian finamcially for the first offense and the bucks pile up along with severe restrictions ever thereafter. Laws got real tough around the time he started offending. We are asking, “who gave him the car?” No license sonc ’90 makesit possible to buy or register during that time. Nobody has any sympathy for this guy here.

I have to laugh at people who are saying TWO DUIs are intolerable, since I’ll bet that they voted for Bush/Cheney who BOTH have TWO DUIs on their record. I guess it all depends on their politics as to whether or not they should be locked up. Hillary should be locked up, but NOT two DUIs guys as long as they are rich and famous.

As for a solution, after two DUIs, such people should have a lifetime requirement to have the alcohol interlock installed on ANY vehicle that they drive. If they drive a vehicle without one, they should be arrested and be charged with a felony. This would necessitate a Federal data base which already exists so that ALL motor vehicle agencies will be alerted if such a person rents or buys a car.The laws should be that car dealers, and any sale of a motor vehicle MUST require a background check before the sale is allowed. If they get around these measures, then they are a public menace and if caught,should be permanently removed from society in prison for life. Driving without any license or revoked one should be a felony and at least five years prison time. Only when we get serious about this will change happen.

Frankly, I think “Duterte Harry” in the Phillipines has the right idea!

Just a month into his presidency, Duterte used his inaugural State of the Nation Address to warn the public to steer clear of drug use, the scale of which was “staggering and scary” and promised no relenting in his crackdown.

Nicknamed “the punisher” and “Duterte Harry” for his brutal fight against crime, Duterte hit back at activists incensed by a surge in the killing of suspected drug traffickers, saying human rights should protect dignity, not let criminals destroy the country.

“There will be no let up in this campaign. Double your efforts. Triple them if need be,” Duterte said in a message in support of the police in his speech to a joint legislative session.

“We will not stop until the last drug lord, the last financier and the last pusher have surrendered or put behind bars. Or below the ground if they so wish.”

Duterte did not mention the number of suspected drugs dealers killed during his efforts but police have logged 240 deaths related to the trade since he took office, although other estimates are higher.

He said 120,000 people had surrendered to police in the past month, and 70,000 were drug pushers.

“The sheer number and problem will drown us,” he said.

Duterte was swept to power in May on a wave of public anti-establishment frustration over crime and poverty, winning 16 million votes and an approval rating of 91 percent, one of the highest recorded in the Philippines.

@ Paul Schulte – I’d handle those “addicted” to alcohol the same way we handle those “addicted” to child pornography or sex with underaged children or kleptomania. The addiction does not excuse bad behavior that flows from it.